The Philosophy of Mysticism: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Religion » The Philosophy of Mysticism » The Philosophy of Mysticism

The Philosophy of Mysticism

Page: 1 2

The Philosophy of Mysticism

kNoctis
Threading

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
Total Topics: 63
Total Posts: 538

Posted 05/06/07 - 12:32 AM: Subject: The Philosophy of Mysticism	#1
One of the common ideas among all mystic traditions is that there is complete incommensurability between God and man. God, or Tao, or the One, are all completely transcendent. How then, can mystical theists maintain that God is even able to interact with the world? Complete incommensurability would seem to entail a complete lack of possibile interaction, since it seems difficult to understand how wholly dissimilar things can have causal relationships. Does this mean that mysticism also depends upon some level of fidiesm? If holding to a mystical theology entails that you must accept a logical contradiction, does that mean that a mystic is necessarily a fideist? I've just started thinking about these ideas lately.

Ariston
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 19, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 144

Posted 05/06/07 - 01:28 AM:	#2
The Abrahamic God made man in his image. So there is some point of comparison between God and Man, although God is not a man. So there is some common union of what the image of God is in man, and it is in that image Man can relate to God, or God can relate to Man. If we did not have this image there would be no way to relate one to the other, so it can't be completely incommensurable. If it were, God would not have created man in his image. I have never experienced any mystical revelations.
"Were it not for number and its nature, nothing that exists would be clear to anybody either in itself or in its relation to other things...You can observe the power of number exercising itself ... in all acts and the thoughts of men, in all handicrafts and music." Pythagoras

geoff23
Student

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: Brighton, Sussex, England.
Total Topics: 85
Total Posts: 2650

Posted 05/06/07 - 04:14 AM:	#3
Andy, All mystical forms of religion claim that "God" is both transcendent and immanent. They are Panentheist. They do not see "God" as somehow seperated from creation. It is more traditional theism that has a concept of a God detached from creation. Geoff
The poets did not win; the philosophers surrendered. (Umberto Eco)

harvey1
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 263

Posted 05/06/07 - 04:59 AM:	#4
Andy Pedersen wrote: One of the common ideas among all mystic traditions is that there is complete incommensurability between God and man. God, or Tao, or the One, are all completely transcendent. How then, can mystical theists maintain that God is even able to interact with the world? Complete incommensurability would seem to entail a complete lack of possibile interaction, since it seems difficult to understand how wholly dissimilar things can have causal relationships. The interaction can incommensurable since the distance between us and God is immense. Between God and us is a transitional continuum. Think of it like the biblical depiction where God is the King or Lord who lives in a distant land, and his messengers are those who give him a status of the events happening in his kingdom. As Feyerabend suggested, I think, incommensurability is about meaning and language. We have no access to this higher level hierarchy in order to comprehend God (I'm speaking of Hegel's Absolute, Plotinus' One, etc.). Andy Pedersen wrote: Does this mean that mysticism also depends upon some level of fideism? If holding to a mystical theology entails that you must accept a logical contradiction, does that mean that a mystic is necessarily a fideist? I think that most mystics throughout history believed that non-classical logic is necessary. This doesn't necessarily mean they rejected logic, just the limited version of Aristotle's classical logic.

kNoctis
Threading

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 06, 2005
Total Topics: 63
Total Posts: 538

Posted 05/06/07 - 06:41 PM:	#5
Ariston wrote: The Abrahamic God made man in his image. So there is some point of comparison between God and Man, although God is not a man. So there is some common union of what the image of God is in man, and it is in that image Man can relate to God, or God can relate to Man. If we did not have this image there would be no way to relate one to the other, so it can't be completely incommensurable. If it were, God would not have created man in his image. This answer assumes that God exists in the first place, since in order to find the theology of a religion valid, you have to hold that the religion's divinity exists. But, my question is, can a mystic, or one who may practice mysticism, conclude that the divinity exists through a rational process, or is that belief inherently irrational - insofar as it may involve the contradiction of two completely dissimilar things interacting. Note that here I'm addressing your use of revealed theology - and specifically scripture - to answer my question. If you wish to argue for the rationality of accepting scripture, or if your attempt utilized natural, or philosophical theology to answer my question, then the assumptions would disappear. You also could be saying that mystic experience itself is invalid. Is that so? geoff23 wrote: All mystical forms of religion claim that "God" is both transcendent and immanent. They are Panentheist. They do not see "God" as somehow seperated from creation. It is more traditional theism that has a concept of a God detached from creation. Are you saying that mystical christianity is actually panentheist? The Catholic church tolerates Christian mysticism to a large degree. Many historic Catholic mystics have even been canonized, such as St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, etc... If Islamic sufism were to deny God's absolute transcendence, such a belief would come dangerously close to shirk. Shirk is an Islamic term that means "associating anything with Allah". Do both of the mystical traditions in these religions exist outside of them? Similarly, the actual Jewish definition of God is "The One Who Is". A definition such as this points to something that rises above all abstractions and categoricals, and is a pure act of existence. God identifies himself to Moses in this way when Moses asks God how he will speak for Him. That very same definition of God has also been appropriated by the eminent Catholic philosopher Etienne Gilson in his work God and Philosophy Furthermore, what about Plotinus' One? If Plotinus made anything clear, it was that the One is completely and fully transcendent, and yet Man could also come into contact with it. If you could offer any support for your statement, that would also help you. Edited by Andy Pedersen on 05/06/07 - 06:45 PM

lightandstorm
An Ironic Paradigm

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 10, 2007
Location: San Francisco
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 27

Posted 05/07/07 - 01:25 PM:	#6
I'm probably no expert in mysticism, but of all the types of religion, this is the one I most identify myself with. I do believe that mystical Christianity is panentheist. Not pantheist. It's not to say that God is the world and nothing more. It's more like God is present in everything, we are all parts of God, but God is greater than the sum of his parts. He is both immanent and transcendant, both are incredibly important characteristics. If anything, the mystic is accepting of paradox. God is both fully transcendant and fully immanent at the same time. Jesus was both fully human and fully spirit. It is, I believe, the essence of myth, which is very important to the mystic. Myth and metaphor are statements which are both true and false at the same time, yet do not lose value. You cannot have one without the other. Irony is extremely important.
"What makes our lives so horrible is that our salvation never comes in the form we would have chosen." - John L'Heureux

geoff23
Student

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: Brighton, Sussex, England.
Total Topics: 85
Total Posts: 2650

Posted 05/08/07 - 03:09 AM:	#7
Andy Pedersen wrote: Are you saying that mystical christianity is actually panentheist? Yes. Of course it is. The Catholic church tolerates Christian mysticism to a large degree. Many historic Catholic mystics have even been canonized, such as St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, etc... If Islamic sufism were to deny God's absolute transcendence, such a belief would come dangerously close to shirk. Shirk is an Islamic term that means "associating anything with Allah". Do both of the mystical traditions in these religions exist outside of them? Sufism is also Panentheist. I suspect that Sufism is treated with a great deal of suspicion by many conservative muslims. Similarly, the actual Jewish definition of God is "The One Who Is". A definition such as this points to something that rises above all abstractions and categoricals, and is a pure act of existence. God identifies himself to Moses in this way when Moses asks God how he will speak for Him. That very same definition of God has also been appropriated by the eminent Catholic philosopher Etienne Gilson in his work God and Philosophy Qabbalism is Panentheist. Furthermore, what about Plotinus' One? If Plotinus made anything clear, it was that the One is completely and fully transcendent, and yet Man could also come into contact with it. Plotinus was a Panentheist. If you could offer any support for your statement, that would also help you. The single most important characteristic which links all forms of mysticism is that they are all forms of Panentheism. That includes Gnostic Christianity, Sufism, Qabbalism, Zen Buddhism, Greek Paganism, all forms of Hinduism, Western Occultism (e.g. Crowley), etc.... I'm not sure what to offer in support of this. I thought it was common knowledge, especially in a place like this. Geoff
The poets did not win; the philosophers surrendered. (Umberto Eco)

ying
Stoned ape theorist

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Feb 20, 2004
Location: Lichtenvoorde, Netherlands
Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 1155

Posted 05/08/07 - 04:03 AM:	#8
Andy Pedersen wrote: One of the common ideas among all mystic traditions is that there is complete incommensurability between God and man. God, or Tao, or the One, are all completely transcendent. How then, can mystical theists maintain that God is even able to interact with the world? Complete incommensurability would seem to entail a complete lack of possibile interaction, since it seems difficult to understand how wholly dissimilar things can have causal relationships. Does this mean that mysticism also depends upon some level of fidiesm? If holding to a mystical theology entails that you must accept a logical contradiction, does that mean that a mystic is necessarily a fideist? I've just started thinking about these ideas lately. You're antropomorphisising God. God, by virtue of being Himself, can do anything He pleases. Though there's an incommensurability from a bottom-up approach, God can do whatever He wants in a top-down way. God isn't limited by anything, since He is/created everything in the first place.
*"I determined nothing."* -Sceptical expression

Ariston
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 19, 2007
Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 144

Posted 05/08/07 - 08:49 AM:	#9
Andy Pedersen wrote: You also could be saying that mystic experience itself is invalid. Is that so? There are Christian Mystics. I have had mystical experiences, but I didn't dissolve, and I don't know if they would qualify as being mystical or not. I have at times had very Platonic experiences, especially when studying maths, but I could just be crazy, but there are others who experience it and aren't considered crazy.
"Were it not for number and its nature, nothing that exists would be clear to anybody either in itself or in its relation to other things...You can observe the power of number exercising itself ... in all acts and the thoughts of men, in all handicrafts and music." Pythagoras

dimka
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 14, 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Total Topics: 52
Total Posts: 1016

Posted 05/08/07 - 12:15 PM:	#10
"Fideism is any of several belief systems which hold, on various grounds, that reason is irrelevant to religious faith." Mysticism & Fideism are for charlatans and mountebanks only. I have had mystical experiences, but I didn't dissolve, and I don't know if they would qualify as being mystical or not. I have at times had very Platonic experiences, especially when studying maths, but I could just be crazy, but there are others who experience it and aren't considered crazy. Oh come on give me a break. Same goes for NDE's and OBE's. Simply peculiar brain-states, nothing else.

Page: 1 2

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.